I've played some SL and ASL so have a fair idea of the mechanics and game play involved (as well as the size of the rule book and the amazing memory required to play). I've been doing a bit of reading about the systems and LNL appears to be the more "integrated" system with the best flow, but....

Just wondering what people would recommend out of these 4 systems. I realise that each has its own pros and cons, but which one would win in the end?

Thanks for your help geeks.

Tom

Having played all four games, I can tell you that you might enjoy any of them, for any number of reasons. Now, before you think that's a cop-out, let me explain:

ASL is a highly-detailed game that requires a lot of time, money, and effort to get into. The game itself is fairly easy to play ... it is the learning curve that can be daunting. However, if you want the very best tactical game out there ... ASL is well worth the time, money, and effort spent to learn and enjoy the game.

ASLSK is probably the best way to decide if ASL is the game for you. While the rules are very, very streamlined, the basic flow of play is the same, minus all the chrome that causes such a steep learning curve for the "regular" game. If you're unsure of whether you'd enjoy ASL, then the ASLSK is perfect ... a low-cost, low-learning-curve version of the "real thing".

ATS is a tactical game that is similar to ASL, but with two provisions. First, while ASL is a modular system that builds on things that came before, ATS modules are self-contained ... you need no other modules to play an ATS module. So, the cost factor, compared to ASL, is much lower. The downside is ... ATS modules don't "link" ... so the market for additional scenarios using previously-published units is non-existent.

Second, the learning curve is much less steep for ATS. Is that a good thing or a bad thing? I won't get into that here ... it's really up to what you're looking for.

LnL is a nice tactical game that has a minimal rulebook and plays rather quickly. It's learning curve is the least steep of the three "main" systems (ASLSK being probably the easiest of all to learn), and the components are rather handsome. Again, LnL is self-contained ... if you buy Band of Heroes, you can't use the units to play Forgotten Heroes.

I like all of these games, and enjoy them as my time permits. ASL is my favorite game, simply because I have spent the requisite amount of time learning the game. I don't think you can go wrong with any of the four games you mentioned. It really depends on what you are looking for.

If you like really cool-looking components and a relatively simple game system, but with only two modules available ... go for LnL.

If you like a game system that is similar to ASL, but with a lot less complexity, but quite a few modules ... go for ATS.

If you'd like to see if ASL is the game for you ... go for ASLSK.

If you want the Cadillac of tactical gaming systems, with a vast array of scenarios, modules, and components ... go for ASL.

Thanks Brien. I was sort of looking for a pros and cons list for each, which is pretty much what you gave me. It would be interesting to hear from some "LnL"ers to see what their take on the systems are. IT is a bit of a shame LnL and ATS aren't scenario based using the base components ike ASL and ASL SK. Good Advice about ASL SK - I'll have to take a look.

I remember reading somewhere that the SL/ASL/ASLSK family focuses more on infantry, with less detailed armour, whereas ATS has more detailed armour and less detailed infantry. So maybe that will help you decide.

Tom, if you're trying out the ASLSK (a great idea) you might also try out the competitively-priced ATS version of the starter kits- the ATS BG 1 or 2 (BG for 'basic game'). These have the core rules of the main game and enough counters to play through five quite good scenarios. It's true to that ATS can't rival the sheer number of homegrown and magazine ASL scenarios, but the system is well-established and growing in popularity- certainly worth trying to see if you prefer its impulse-movement system to ASL's.

I think Brien has provided a great overview of these four systems, but I disagree with one comment of his:

Brien Martin wrote:

(ASLSK being probably the easiest of all to learn)

While much of the ASL "chrome" has been removed from the ASLSK rules to keep them relatively simple, they still contain the ASL defensive fire rules and rout rules... two rules sections that have given many beginning players fits (just look through the ASLSK rules folders here to see what I mean).

I'm not familiar enough with ATS or LnL to make any definitive judgment (having only looked through the downloadable rules that are available for each of those games), but I question whether ASLSK is really the easiest of the four to learn.

Tom Hilder wrote:

...but which one would win in the end?

What exactly do you mean by "win"?

If you are asking which game has the most realistic feel, the most detail, the most comprehensive coverage of WWII, or the most success in terms of copies sold and/or number of active players... that would be ASL.

But if, for example, you are asking which game you will enjoy playing the most in the three hours you might have available once a month on a Friday night... then one of those other systems is probably going to be a much better choice than ASL!

There are reasons why each of these systems are popular and successful that have little to do with one being "better" than another.

Naturally, as an ASLer, ASLSK was easiest to learn, as I already knew the rules in advance. So, there was a huge amount of bias in the answer.

I still think ASLSK, in its entirety, is a little easier to learn than LnL (the spotting rules in LnL can take a little time to digest and apply correctly, and the combat result is not on a neat CRT that you can quickly look up). For some, LnL will be the easier to learn because there's no routing rules to learn.

I know that most boardgamers (not just wargamers) are well-educated people ... so ASLSK, LnL, and ATS should not be daunting in the least. ASL, though, requires a lot of time and effort to read and understand the rules and their exceptions.

If you are asking which game has the most realistic feel, the most detail, the most comprehensive coverage of WWII, or the most success in terms of copies sold and/or number of active players... that would be ASL.

But if, for example, you are asking which game you will enjoy playing the most in the three hours you might have available once a month on a Friday night... then one of those other systems is probably going to be a much better choice than ASL!

There are reasons why each of these systems are popular and successful that have little to do with one being "better" than another.

[/q]By win I was sort of looking at the combination of feel, coverage of WW2 and enjoyment. Some rules and games can be very detailed and "accurate" but lack the real "feel" of tactics, tension, etc. I suppose I was looking at more infantry based combat with limited armour.

The idea of the ATS BG sounds a possibility as is ASL SK.

I sort of get the feel that ASL/ASL SK covers most things with turn based moves (and a lot of detail, accuracy and depth), while ATS is more tank based but with impulses and a fair amount of depth, while LnL is more infantry based with impulse moves and is a bit more limited due to the lack of scenarios, etc out at present.

Well end of the day these are all games. So perhaps a better question is which game will you play most and have a bigger field of players.

So of these 4, ASL is in my experience the most preponderant, there are ASL Clubs in Sydney, Melbourne, Perth and Canberra, and a national ASL community that can pretty much hook you up with other players in any city in Australia. There are a series of ASL tournaments Sydney, Melbourne, Canberra and Perth.

So whilst there can't be any real answer, only what is best for you, if you are looking for a gaming community, ASL is the one I know of, and I'd probably have heard of an ATR or LnL community. Given the cross over of interest, the ASL Community is probably also the ATR & LnL (and for that matter Combat Commander:Europe) community as well.

... just coming back to this thread and I finally decided to get Combat Commander :Europe.

Some of the reasons were -

Speed of play.I think that this is a better simulation of a tactical situation where there is limited control.The objective set-up and points.The variable timeframe for the end of the game.Simple rules that have a lot of the mechanics actually in the game and not in the rulebook.

Thanks for everyones help - it has allowed me to consider what is important to me in a WW2 tactical game and how I would like tat expressed.